Tuesday, July 12, 2022

Sharon4mnagBillDahnWarriorsonlawyersvsMuslimKeithEllisonMNAG2022

Magner v. Gallagher  ruling case law Disparity Fair housing 






                10July2022
          Public Notic Electiohn Ethics,Reform.Educational.
            High Regard/Respect for the Office but not for Muslim Keith Ellison.
           Sharon Save the Children Bill exposing Excessive force re Josh Mars and Bills
 
           Notice to DFL Sec State Steve Simon to place Bill Dahns website online.
           Why are 2 H Aug9th,2022
          homegrown St.Pauites on the Bill Dahn, Freedom/Justice/Humanity022Primary Ballots
 
 
to Remove Muslim Keith Ellison from the Office of MNAG
scrool down
           Republican Sharon Anderson 
 
          Happy Birthday
 



Bill Dahn, 2010

Minn


In a message dated 7/7/2022 3:25:25 PM Central Standard Time, sharon4anderson@aol.com writes:
 
 
Image result for mn ag office

Minnesota Attorney General

 
Homepage for the website of the Minnesota Attorney General, includes links to press releases as well as consumer and charity information.
Jeremiah Ellison
 
Jeremiah Ellison
Kim Ellison
 
Kim Ellison
Tim Walz
 
Tim Walz
Doug Wardlow
 
Doug Wardlow
Ilhan Omar
 
Ilhan Omar
Derek Chauvin
 
Derek Chauvin
Peggy Flanagan
 
Peggy Flanagan

 
 Bills research Memorials to webmaster Rev Mary Jane Duchene,Friend Alice etc.
 
THERE IS A DEMOCRAT DFL PRIMARY, BILL DAHN v KIETH ELLISON 
 
IT'S ELECTION TIME BILL DAHN  A  DEMOCRAT  ON THE BALLOT FOR MINNESOTA IS GIVING PERMISSION FOR MY OTHER CANDIDATES RUNNING FOR MINNESOTA  ATTORNEY GENERAL.
 TO USE BILL DAHN  INFORMATION IN THEIR NEW REALEST 
POLITICAL 
  1. Including results for  any new news releases

    Bill Dahn - Power Voter

 
  1. Bill Dahn. 651-285-7657. 12 Garden Glen ... bill4dahn@aol.com . Ojibwa-Sioux #408819111. BillDahn.Blogspot.com. BILL DAHN FREEDOM / JUSTICE / HUMANITY . Posted by ...




Bill Dahn

 R
 
 
 
 
Site hosted by Angelfire.com: Build your free website today!
undefined
 

Bill Dahn
CONTACT ME: Helping Native Americans
Freedom Fighter for All People, Hobbies - Cars

William Paul Dahn
Homestead 256 Morton St. W
St. Paul, Mn.55107
Tel: (651) 453-1992 E-mail:
 eagledahn1@aol.com
Personal web page
 

Minnesota Attorney General

 
Homepage for the website of the Minnesota Attorney General, includes links to press releases as well as consumer and charity information.
 
 

Saturday, March 5, 2022

Minnesotans rally in support of trucker convoy


         Fri.4Mar2022
       Will work on this Tax Objections,Later
         Sharons Blindness re ADA that City St. Paul send all invoices,ratifications in pdf format via email to imediately Object. 
         Thank God 4 PC and pdf files.
        Summary:
           City St. Paul,MN canot keep sending Inspections without Valid Complaints, by Snail Mail its to hard to scann in to object.
        Further how can City St. Paul charge interest based on Fraud?
           Re Penalty of Perjury Affiant owner 697 Surrey for 30 yrs must expose the Citys Corrupt Practices Act.
            Will update and place on Blog
Property Tax and Value Lookup | Ramsey County

In a message dated 3/4/2022 10:08:42 AM Central Standard Time, sharon4anderson@aol.com writes:
 
 
 Parcel
0 ID
OwnerProperty Address
SHARON LEE ANDERSON697 SURREY AVE
Property Search Results
 
2022
 
Property Photo 1
 
ax Summary
  2021 Payable2020 Payable2019 Payable2018 Payable
 Estimated Market Value$77,300$75,700$57,500$51,000
 Taxable Market Value$62,200$60,600$46,000$40,800
      
 Net Tax Amount$782.98$823.34$629.72$536.14
+Special Assessments$427.02$1,240.66$1,230.28$991.86
=Total Taxes$1,210.00$2,064.00$1,860.00$1,528.00
+Penalty$0.00$0.00$0.00$0.00
+Interest$0.00$0.00$0.00$0.00
+Fees$0.00$0.00$0.00$0.00
-Amount Paid$1,210.00$2,064.00$1,860.00$1,528.00
=Outstanding Balance$0.00$0.00$0.00$0.00
Tax Summary
  
Special Assessments
Note: + sign indicates a multiple year assessment. Click on the + to view additional years.

Note: Installment amount is the amount that will be included in the property tax total for the referenced payable year.
Remaining Balance is the amount eligible for prepayment. Prepayment must be paid in full by November 15th of the current year.
Please call the City of Saint Paul General Assessment line for payoff amounts or additional information concerning any Saint Paul assessment. You can reach them at 651-266-8858 or go to Assessment Lookup.

Suburban property owners should call 651
 
 
 
 

Thursday, March 25, 2021

Liberalism is in its death throes Woke CancellCulture


Liberalism is in its death throes: Out-of-control cancel culture, borders open again to illegal immigration, and the Democrat majorities in Congress attempting to impose one-party rule on the country are nothing less than the symptoms of a dying ideology, a modern liberalism that has ...

Friday, January 29, 2021

Impeaching a Former President Is Plainly Constitutional

Impeaching a F

Two days ago, all but five of the fifty sitting Republican United States Senators voted to dismiss the House’s second impeachment of Donald Trump, relying on the nakedly dishonest argument that the Constitution does not allow former federal officials to be impeached and tried by Congress. That Republican ploy was a travesty, and it is good that it failed.

Many scholars and commentators have already weighed in on the Republicans’ argument, and the overwhelming weight of opinion is that there is no constitutional bar to impeaching or trying a former president. One particularly good op-ed discussing this question was penned by Professor Laurence Tribe, who forcefully responded to a contrarian (or, more accurately, a crankish) view that had been advanced by a retired federal judge.

As Tribe and others have shown, all of the ways in which we understand and interpret the Constitution lead to the conclusion that Trump can be convicted after a Senate impeachment trial. Notably, for example, there is ample evidence that the framers’ original view of the impeachment power certainly extended to post-term impeachments and trials.

Here, I want to offer an even more basic argument to explain why the Constitution unquestionably allows impeachments in the current context. The constitutional text itself makes it abundantly clear that there is no barrier to trying Trump next month—or later this year, or any time at all.

Allow me to be blunt: One need not even look at the historical context, the canons of construction, or any parade of horribles that will soon be on the march if we do not hold a trial, as persuasive and legally sufficient as those arguments might be. The words of the Constitution itself make clear that what Democrats are doing is fully legitimate.

Textualism Is Not Always Dispositive, But It Is Absolutely Clear Here

Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution provides: “The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” According to Republicans, this means that Congress cannot impeach or convict a former president, because he is not the President. By virtue of the fact that he is no longer in office and cannot be removed, they say, he cannot be impeached or convicted in the first place.

I will turn to a related constitutional provision that puts this matter in full context in a moment, but imagine first that the words above were the only relevant constitutional directive on the question at hand. What does the Constitution say, simply as a matter of text? It says that, “on Impeachment … and Conviction,” a president shall be removed from office. What it does not say, however—what it does not even come close to saying—is that the House and Senate may not pursue the impeachment and conviction of someone who is no longer in office. It says only that if they do so against a sitting president, a convicted miscreant shall be removed from office. If that person is already out of office, then removal is obviously unnecessary.

Again, remember that Article II, Section 4 only applies to “The President, Vice President and all civil Officers.” That only means that when any of those people is impeached and convicted, he shall be removed from office. It says nothing about what to do about anyone else who has been impeached, such as a former president.

There is no way to read those words as a prohibition on trying and convicting ex-presidents (or other impeachable officials). Imagine an anti-burglary law requiring that ex-felons be sentenced to longer terms than first-time offenders. Such a law could not be held somehow to mean that first-time offenders cannot be convicted of burglary. It merely means that a particular consequence shall apply to one category of offenders and not to others.

As far as the Constitution tells us, Congress could impeach anyone it wants, anytime it wants. Again, the only thing that Article II, Section 4 tells us is that if a person is convicted and is currently holding office, then he shall be removed. Republicans want to rewrite that provision to say that the only time that Congress can hold impeachment proceedings is when a president is still in office, but that is not what the provision says.

To summarize the point as simply as possible, the Constitution says that a sitting president, if he is impeached and convicted, shall be removed from office. Republicans read those words and draw this conclusion: “Only sitting presidents may be impeached and convicted.” The correct conclusion, however, is actually obvious to the point of being trivial: “If a former president is impeached and convicted, he obviously need not be removed from office.”

Indeed, we can think of impeaching and trying a former pr


ormer President Is Plainly Constitutional